By Decision no 869/2024, adopted in the context of the Settlement Procedure laid down in Article 29A of Law 3959/2011, the Hellenic Competition Commission (HCC), in Plenary sitting, unanimously accepted the Settlement Proposals submitted by 18 undertakings operating in the market for the provision of cadastral survey services and support services for the creation of a national cadastre throughout the Greek territory and imposed fines totaling €1,081,339.64.
The above case concerns anti-competitive bid-rigging practices.
The investigation was launched in November 2021 in the market for the provision of cadastral survey services and support services for the creation of a national cadastre. In total, on-site inspections (dawn raids) were carried out at the premises of 26 undertakings operating in the above sector.
One of the undertakings investigated applied for immunity from fines under the Leniency Programme, in accordance with HCC Decision 526/VI/2011.
Eighteen (18) of the undertakings investigated were placed under the Settlement Procedure, pursuant to para. 14 of HCC Decision no 790/2022.
The investigation has established some of the undertakings investigated concerted together in the context of meetings and personal contacts, in order to agree in advance on an allocation scheme with regard to the individual twenty-eight (28) cadastral survey projects in the context of the tender launched on 04.10.2013 by the company under the name NATIONAL CADASTRE & MAPPING AGENCY S.A. , with HELLENIC CADASTRE, a body governed by public law, as the current universal successor thereof) for the “Award of contracts for cadastral surveys & support services for the integration of the remaining areas of the country in the National Cadastre" (hereinafter also referred to as KTIMA 13), by commonly determining the lowest bidder. These undertakings engaged in a horizontal bid-rigging agreement, namely in an agreement and/or concerted practice regarding the allocation of cadastral survey service awarding in the context of the relevant tenders by determining the lowest bidder for each of these projects (horizontal market sharing agreement). Through the above conduct, assessed as a whole, the undertakings involved proactively reduced the uncertainty entailed by autonomous competitive behaviour.
This horizontal agreement was of a single and continuous nature (with individual differentiations for each company) and extended from September 2013 to December 2020.
When determining the amount of the fines, the HCC calculated the basic amount of the fine, applying the highest rate it has ever applied in similar cases of bid-rigging in public tenders. However, for all the companies involved in the infringement, the amount of the fine was limited to the maximum amount laid down by law in this regard, namely 10% of each undertaking’s total turnover in the financial year preceding the issuance of the decision or the year of cessation of the infringement, as appropriate.
By the above Decision, the HCC granted the company and the applicant natural person the benefit of leniency with full immunity from fines, according to para. 47 of HCC Decision 526/V/2011 (Leniency Program).
The HCC imposed reduced fines on the other settling companies (fines reduced by 15%) for the infringements established of Articles 1 of Law 3959/2011 and 101 TFEU, as follows:
S/N |
Parties fined |
Final amount of fine |
1. |
ADT |
219,456.65 |
2. |
ILIDA |
144,337.94 |
3. |
DOXIADIS ASSOCIATES |
107,766.86 |
4. |
ROIKOS |
105,368.82 |
5. |
CHOROVATIS |
99,177.48 |
6. |
ERATOSTHENIS |
92,091.83 |
7. |
FOTOPO |
78.505.17 |
8. |
MELETI |
50,964.90 |
9. |
SCHEDIASMOS |
39,822.42 |
10. |
PLANITIKI |
28,378.05 |
11. |
ANYSMA |
27,648.53 |
12. |
TOMI |
23,532.72 |
13. |
GEOGRAPHIKI |
21,450.22 |
14. |
GEOAPIKONISI |
17,844.80 |
15. |
CHOROTECHNIKI |
15,759.76 |
16. |
ELPHO |
8,059.05 |
17. |
GAIA IAPETOS |
1,174.44 |
|
TOTAL |
1,081,339.64 |
The total amount of the fines imposed is EUR 1,081,339.64.
Leniency Programme
An undertaking's participation in a cartel, i.e. a secret agreement among competitors to restrict competition by inter alia fixing prices or production, allocating customers or market shares, or by rigging bids, may lead to significant fines from the HCC as well as to criminal sanctions and the undertaking’s exclusion from public tenders and concession contracts for three (3) years from the issuance of the HCC’s decision.
The HCC’s Leniency Programme has significant advantages for undertakings, associations of undertakings and natural persons involved in cartels, as it offers:
- Full or partial immunity from administrative fines or reductions thereof,
- Elimination of punishability or reduced sentence for the natural persons responsible for the infringements,
- Immunity from any kind of administrative sanctions, and
- Non-exclusion of undertakings from public tenders or concession contracts.
For more information on the HCC’s Leniency Programme, please visit: https://www.epant.gr/en/legislation/leniency-programme.html or call +30 210 88 09 100.
Further information on the HCC’s whistleblower tool is available on the HCC’s website, at: https://www.epant.gr/en/enimerosi/whistleblowing-system-for-citizens-business.html
Settlement Procedure
The Settlement Procedure concerns cases where undertakings or associations of undertakings make a clear and unequivocal acknowledgement of participation in and liability for horizontal agreements and the subsequent breach of competition law (Article 1 of the Greek Competition Act and/or Article 101 TFEU). As a result, they can obtain a reduction of the imposed fine by 15%, provided that certain conditions are fulfilled, while benefits are also granted in accordance with Article 44 (3A and 3B) of Law 3959/2011.
The Settlement Procedure aims at simplifying and speeding up the administrative decision-making procedure of the HCC, as well as at reducing the number of appeals against the HCC’s decisions before administrative courts.
The Settlement Procedure allows a better allocation of HCC’s resources in order to deal with more cases thereby reducing the administrative burden and increasing the deterrent effect of its enforcement action, while simultaneously increasing citizens’ awareness in the effective and timely punishment of undertakings infringing competition law.